The Chu Forums

Dave has officially subplanted Gordon for the biggest horseshoes

Wait... what?

Yeah... it happened right after you and Fynn left.

It was Joel's game, Chicago Hi-Low with a wild, a switch, and a burn.

Let's just say that before the last three moves were done, Joel and I had decent/questionable hands, Dunc seemed to be a shoe in for winning both, and Dave had ABSOLUTELY NO REASON BEING IN THE HAND. He should have been sitting on the sidelines with Tyson. His crap was soooooo crappy that pigeons would've walked by with their wings covering their heads for fear of his crap splashage. Pigs would've turned their noses away in disgust from the stink. My daughter's diaper pail, would have melted from the toxicity of his turdiness, but the Donkey in him wouldn't allow it. In fact, the creativity that he needed to employ could only have been thought up by the Donkiest of Donkeys. I don't think that even Joel would have had the insight to think to himself, "Hey, I could try this. The biggest Donkey move ever. If anyone can pull it off, I could. Yeah, that just might work". I mean, who even thinks up this kind of Donkeyness???????


And when all was said and done, Duncan won nothing.

I heard about that donkey action... he put trip fours on the bottom (one covered) and the fourth 4 was the burn card... leaving him with only 2 playable cards on his low hand (which beats any 3, 4 or 5 card low hands).

That isn't horseshoe... that's donkey licking his butthole and making him giggle so hard that he doesn't realize he needs to fold.

i don't get it. so what did dave win with?
besides the obvious luck?

There was a swap.. he had 2-4-4-5 plus covered card showing on the bottom. He swapped his covered 4 from up top with the covered card on the bottom (which gave him trip 4's on the bottom). There was also a burn card at the end, and the burn card was a 4, so all 4's don't play, meaning for his low hand, he had 2-5 which is almost super nut low hand (I'm guessing 2-3 would be ultimate low nuts).

oh haha.
did the swap happen before or after the burn? if it happened before it's even funnier.

It happened before, that's why Jai is calling horseshoe on Dave.

i am glad it happened. that was the whole point of the rule of the burn being last was to promote that donkeyness to try things like going for that big win when any other chance to win seems lost. so you are never really out even at the end. hence donkey! same for the high hand, not even the best hand (save for maybe a natural 4 of a kind) is safe from the burn.

Lol maybe? I'd say a natural 4 of a kind with a burn card is a pretty safe bet. Better yet if your 5th card is wild lol.

Actually, not necessarily. A four of a kind with a burnt fifth card is still technically not a 5 card poker hand. You need the tag along fifth card in order to make it legitimate. Any burn card on the high hand will essentially render it a lesser hand, unless everyone staying in for the high has a burned card too.

wut?
you mean to tell me that a 4 of a kind with a burnt 9 gets beat by 2, 3, 4, 5, 7? i'm pretty sure that wasn't the case in previous games that we've had burnt cards, because not all hands need all 5 cards to be a hand (a pair for example only needs 2 cards). the extra cards should only be in play if needed for a kicker. otherwise they're moot, burnt or not.
so a four of a kind, regardless if there's a 5 card acting as a kicker or not, will still be a four of a kind. a straight, however, NEEDS 5 cards, so a burnt card would kill it. the same goes obviously for a flush and full house. however, a pair, two pair, trips and quads only need those respective amounts without a kicker (unless someone has the same exact hand, which would be impossible without wilds in the case of trips and quads).

at least, that's how we've been playing in the past.

How does that work? Like, would 2-2-2-2 four card hand lose against a five card bicycle straight? I would think that the four card hand quads would beat at least most five card hands because the fifth card in a quads hand never makes a difference anyway right?

Haha, what happened was... I was typing my message, and I clicked submit. Then I switched to another window for about 5 minutes, and when I switched back, I quickly saw that I was back at the compose message screen, so I thought I forgot to click submit. Then I realized that it was because I clicked submit after you posted your message.